Like: the structure of the site takes me back to 1999, which is very nostalgic. RIP Web 1.0.

Dislike: we tend to repeat the same basic talking points over and over - online bad, digital bad, modern gaming bad, etc. It's bland and uncritical.

Issues in gaming news tend to be be forced into a pre-existing narrative regardless of the facts. For example, in the Wolfenstein Switch thread, the publisher is blamed for offloading the game's content to a download when in reality it's Nintendo's fault for restricting cartridge size to only 32GB. But on this site it seems like Nintendo can never be wrong.

I hear you PT! I think sometimes I go overboard exalting physical media and denigrating online, mainly because I see the industry and mainstream media pushing the other way so much. I think me and Sonic are both guilty of this to some degree.

Some of that is fine but after a while it starts to look like we're lashing out constantly and that can be draining to readers. So I will try to maintain a more positive attitude. After all, there is still a lot to like!

And just because I don't care for the online scene doesn't make it right to rain on everybody else' parade.

Good: The sheer number of reviews. Nicely organized. Consistent rating system. Great presentation; including the banners and the gentle colors. You know how to appreciate old games, even ones from the late 70's.

Bad: The hatred toward anything online. To that end, it's hard to take any of your reviews of modern games seriously since you you don't play the online components or download the free updates. In some cases, you may only be playing a very early version of the game, or missing the best part of the game (which is in online multiplayer, etc.). I honestly think reviews from such games should be scrubbed from the site. There are so many older games that haven't been reviewed, so you'll still not run out of games to review should you stop reviewing modern ones. Another solution would be to put a disclaimer that you didn't play online features.

* Overall website layout and formatting. I agree with the others, the overall look of the site is a trip down memory lane to a "simpler time." I sweat to Bob, if this site ever gets a facelift, I'm out. Entirely. On the flip side, that might be a good idea for an April Fool's prank...

* Simplicity and informal nature of the review format. Not that I agree with every score, but there's not a lot of grandstanding involved, just simple reasons why The Critic liked the game, or why he didn't. At the end of the day, how much info do you really need? Good is good and bad is bad!

* Generally welcoming forum environment. Generally. Much better than 99% of other sites out there. Put it this way: this is the **only** gaming website where I am a member of the forums. Sure, I lurk on other sites, but this is the only one where I ever feel like sharing my opinion. I'm very glad to have gotten to know a few of you over the years.

Dislike:

* Some older reviews aren't the most "woke." Makes my skin crawl seeing Winston referred to as "the black guy" in, not one, but two separate reviews of the modern Ghostbusters video game. Then again, as I stated above, one of my favorite things about this site is the informal nature of the reviews, so I guess that comes with the territory. However, while it is rare, there is the occasional review where I feel, personally, that the verbiage crosses the line.

* Some forum users seem to spam the same content over and over. This is less of a knock on this site in particular, and more a commentary on message boards in general. In line with what others have said, yes, I know a vocal number of users here despise the current digital age of gaming, but that doesn't mean they have to post virtually the same responses on each and every new topic page. I would challenge such users to try and branch out a bit and see both sides of an argument before posting "me too!" for the umpteenth time. Some topics are nothing more than the author sharing a link to an article, with little additional or supporting text, while others are just the author posting a link to a YouTube video while essentially saying they agree with everything the dude in the link does. BOR-ING!! I'd like to see a little more effort from such users to make a more well-informed post with their own ideas involved. The best thing about the online forum format is that you have all the time you need to craft your own responses. Use it wisely.

Overall, I'm very, very satisfied with this site, and wouldn't change much about it. Keep up the good work, Critic

Having to wait for messages to be approved before they post keeps me from being super active. It just takes too long to have a conversation. Also, I can never find a picture with a small enough size to make my avatar.

noah98 wrote:Having to wait for messages to be approved before they post keeps me from being super active. It just takes too long to have a conversation.

Seconding this. It's a hassle that doesn't seem to have any payoff. The queue process has barely any effect on what gets posted or not; most of the time, it's moderation after the fact that ends up mattering.

noah98 wrote:Also, I can never find a picture with a small enough size to make my avatar.

I don't think anybody finds a picture already avatar-sized. You find a picture that you like and resize it. You can do this in Paint.